Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:40:48.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explaining the unexpected: electoral reform and democratic governance in Burkina Faso

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2003

Carlos Santiso  and
Augustin Loada
Carlos Santiso
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University in Washington DC and Center for Democratic Governance (CGD) in Burkina Faso (www.cdgbf.org).
Augustin Loada
Affiliation:
University of Ouagadougou and CGD.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The parliamentary elections of May 2002 in Burkina Faso saw the ruling party loose its exclusionary grip on power. For the first time since the restoration of democracy in 1991, the parliamentary opposition now represents a sizeable group. While it retains the majority, the ruling party has to share legislative power with the opposition. These elections marginally alter the structure of power in a deeply presidential system of government. Several institutional and electoral reforms have played a critical role in strengthening the mechanisms of ‘vertical accountability’ and representative democracy. By assessing recent electoral reforms in Burkina Faso, the article underlines the importance of the electoral system in multiparty elections and thus contributes to our understanding of the effects of changes in electoral rules on the distribution of political outcomes. In particular, it underscores the contribution that institutional engineering and electoral reform can make to further democratisation in a semi-authoritarian context. While many challenges to democratic governance and the rule of law remain, the new political landscape holds the promise of changes in the style of government and the emergence of more consensual modes of governance.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Modern African Studies , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , September 2003 , pp. 395 - 419
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors are grateful to Ben Reilly, Grâce d'Almeida, Anna Nordenmark, Roel von Meijenfeldt as well as Christopher Clapham and two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions on earlier drafts. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not reflect those of the CDG, its Board or Council.